This copy is for your personal non-commercial use only. To order presentation-ready copies of Toronto Star content for distribution to colleagues, clients or customers, or inquire about permissions/licensing, please go to: www.TorontoStarReprints.com

DNA sweeps pose wrenching ethical questions: Goar

With a blood sample, a mouth swab or a hair, lab technicians could match evidence at a crime scene to the unique genetic code of a suspect. It was simple, scientific and effective.

In the remote indigenous community of Garden Hill, Manitoba, 500 km north of Winnipeg, police are collecting DNA samples from every male between 15 and 66 years of age to find the killer of 11-year-old Teresa Robinson, who was last seen walking home from a birthday party. (The Canadian Press)

It was also controversial — and remains so.

In the remote indigenous community of Garden Hill, Manitoba, 500 km north of Winnipeg, police are collecting DNA samples from every male between 15 and 66 years of age to find the killer of 11-year-old Teresa Robinson, who was last seen walking home from a birthday party.

The DNA sweep includes an estimated 2,000 boys and men. Participation is voluntary, the police stress. What they don’t say — but everybody in the community knows — is that anyone who says no automatically becomes a suspect.

Article Continued Below

“There is no lack of volunteers,” RCMP spokesman Bert Paquet said last week. He expects officers will have to make three or four more trips to the remote fly-in reserve to collect samples. “It truly demonstrates the length investigators are willing to go in order to bring an unsolved case to successful conclusion.”

Despite misgiving about the technique, Grand Chief Sheila North-Wilson, who represents northern First Nations, supports its use in this case. So does Garden Hill chief Arnold Flett. It has been nine months since the girl’s body was found. No one has been arrested. Everyone in the remote community is edgy and mistrustful.

It has been left to outsiders — mostly lawyers and civil rights activists — to raise red flags about DNA dragnets. They raise five primary concerns:

Sukyana Pillay, executive director and general counsel of the Canadian Civil Liberties Association, has done a lot of thinking about this issue. She chooses her words carefully. “I’m not opposed to DNA searches. But this is the highest level of personal and private information. Police should have a judicially authorized search warrant.”

In her view, the police would need one warrant for every man or boy they approach in this case, the same way they need a warrant to enter a person’s home or search his or her vehicle to find evidence. “We (the CCLA) oppose mass searches and mass surveillance.”

Torontonians are familiar with this clash between individual rights and evidence gathering. In the city’s west end, 13 years ago, 10-year-old Holly Jones vanished on her way home from a friend’s house. Her dismembered body was found in Lake Ontario.

Police went door to door in the neighbourhood and asked approximately 300 men to provide DNA samples. Three refused. One of them, Michael Briere, answered their questions but balked when they pulled out their DNA kit. “I feel it puts the onus on us to prove we’re not guilty — that Big Brother is watching us,” he told officers.

The 35-year-old software developer was put under round-the-clock surveillance. His movements were tracked for a month. Finally, he tossed a Pepsi can into a public recycling bin. Police grabbed it to get their DNA sample. Briere was quickly arrested, charged and convicted of first-degree murder. The case was a legal landmark.

Four high-profile DNA sweeps (also known as “blooding”) have taken place since then: one on Vancouver Island, one in Orangeville, one in Windsor and the current blitz in Garden Hill. Two produced convictions, one turned up no suspects and the Garden Hill investigation is ongoing.

Each of these investigations has been emotionally wrenching — for the family and friends of the victim who need to see the killer brought to justice; and for the wider community, torn between public safety and personal freedom.

The trouble with “revolutionary crime-fighting tools” is seldom the science. It is that society lacks a framework to determine whether the end justifies the means.

More from The Star & Partners

LOADING

Copyright owned or licensed by Toronto Star Newspapers Limited. All rights reserved. Republication or distribution of this content is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of Toronto Star Newspapers Limited and/or its licensors. To order copies of Toronto Star articles, please go to: www.TorontoStarReprints.com